Worcester committees back ban on panhandling in roadways

Friday

Jan 4, 2013 at 6:00 AMJan 4, 2013 at 8:53 PM

By Nick Kotsopoulos TELEGRAM & GAZETTE STAFF

Two City Council subcommittees have endorsed City Manager Michael V. O'Brien's plan to address aggressive panhandling by making it unlawful for people to solicit money from motorists while standing in the street, walking in and out of traffic or standing on a traffic island.

In addition to targeting panhandlers who engage in such activity, the two ordinances approved by the committees Thursday night will eliminate so-called “tag days” — a longstanding practice in the city in which representatives of charitable organizations and youth sports groups solicit donations from motorists at intersections.

During a joint meeting, which attracted more than 35 people, the City Council Public Health and Human Services Committee endorsed the manager's recommendations by a 2-1 vote, while the council's Municipal Operations Committee approved them by a 3-0 vote.

The committees' recommendations will go before the entire City Council for final action Jan. 15.

Councilor-at-Large Konstantina B. Lukes, chairwoman of the Public Health and Human Services Committee, said the ordinances will not infringe on anyone's right to panhandle or solicit money.

She said individuals just won't be allowed to do so while standing within a public way. She added that the ordinances are a first step in dealing with tag days, which she described as being one of the more frustrating problems during the past 10 years.

“We have created a dangerous situation by allowing that kind of activity to occur,” Mrs. Lukes said.

District 4 Councilor Sarai Rivera, who cast the lone vote against the plan, said it does not address the root problems behind panhandling and is more of a Band-Aid solution to the panhandling problem than anything else.

She said she feels the city did not give enough time for outreach efforts to work.

“It's unfair and unrealistic to think that starting (an outreach) program in July would work miracles by the end of October,” Ms. Rivera said. “That makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. Some progress was made and we should have given that program more time. I'm also frustrated about the direction this discussion has taken from the very beginning; we should be talking about the root problems behind this issue.”

More than a dozen people testified before the two committees on the merits of the ordinances.

Several of those who spoke argued against the plan, saying it would infringe on peoples' rights to free speech They added that new ordinances are not needed because there are laws already on the books to deal with aggressive panhandling.

Mike Benedetti said while he appreciates the concerns about pedestrian and traffic safety at intersections, he does not feel the city should be preventing people from asking for help.

“The down side to this plan is the impact it will have on civil liberties and basic social relations,” Mr. Benedetti said. “There is no upside to it. This will not do anything about poverty or addiction.”

Nicole Apostola said panhandling is a symptom of a larger problem, which includes mental health issues, substance abuse and poverty. She said the threat of fines and arrest will not address those issues.

But members of the local business community urged the committees to endorse the manager's plan, saying panhandlers in front of their businesses have not only hurt them, but the city's image as well.

Jim Donoghue, owner of Tweed's Pub Restaurant on Grove Street and president of the North Worcester Business Association, said while Worcester has come a long way in recent years, panhandlers have taken away from a lot of the hard work of local business owners.

City Solicitor David M. Moore emphasized that the ordinances are intended to regulate behavior and not speech. He said similar ordinances have been adopted by other communities and have not been overturned.

“This will not prevent anyone from walking down Main Street and asking for money,” Mr. Moore said. “It will not make it a crime to beg for something, but it will be a crime to remain there after a police officer asks that person to move on. These ordinances have flexibility and they address the public safety issue.”

Those councilors who endorsed the plan were: District 1 Councilor Tony Economou, Mrs. Lukes (who serves on both subcommittees), Councilor-at-Large Michael J. Germain and District 4 Councilor William J. Eddy.

“This will not affect anyone standing on a sidewalk holding a sign and asking for money,” Mr. Germain said. “But if someone is standing in a median or on a traffic island, it will affect them.”

Mr. Eddy, meanwhile, agreed that it is time for the city to end the practice of allowing kids participating in tag days to dart about stopped traffic at intersection to solicit donations for youth sports teams and organizations.

“We need to work with some organizations so they can (solicit) funds in safer places,” he said.

Bill Randell, owner of Advantage Benefits Group Inc. on Pleasant Street, said he would be willing to allow youth groups to conduct tag days on his private property, and other business owners might be willing to do so as well.

Never miss a story

Choose the plan that's right for you.
Digital access or digital and print delivery.